Daily Digest

Image by Tax Credits, Flickr Creative Commons

Daily Digest 5/4 - The War On Cash Begins, How Much Would Zero Emissions Cost?

Monday, May 4, 2015, 9:40 AM

Economy

Sucking Spoilt Milk From A Bloated Dead Sow (Don R.)

There are ways to make money, but that’s not the same thing. Markets must of necessity reflect – the performance of – underlying economies, and to even pretend today’s markets do that is preposterous. Financial markets these days exclusively reflect central banks’ pumping money into their respective bankrupt banking systems, a practice poetically known as QE. Markets need to be functional in order to be called markets and if they don’t we should find another term to label them with.

Australia First to Introduce a Compulsory Tax on Money Itself (Nate)

Prime Minister Tony Abbott said that it was now all about to relieve families and small businesses. For this, the new tax is to be used. The problem is clear. There will be no reduction in taxes for these people, it will only be more money in the pocket of corrupt and seriously deranged politicians who are destroying the western civilization in the blink of an eye.

The IRS seized $107,000 from this business owner for making too many small cash deposits (Yoxa)

It won't be easy for McLellan to get his money back. Many forfeiture targets don't bother to contest seizures under civil forfeiture laws because legal fees would exceed the value of what was taken. But with IJ's help, he might be able to recover the money the IRS took from him.

The IRS declined to comment on the case, citing taxpayer privacy laws.

France Restricts Cash, Movement of Gold & Crypto-Currencies (thc0655)

This is the economic tyranny we face. What is yours really belongs to them from the way they see it. We no longer live in a democratic world. This is all about them controlling the people to sustain their power. The French official reason for these measures is the “war on terror”. In fact, it is the measure that we are witnessing around the globe because those in power feel it slipping away. This is not a war on terror, it is war against the people in the form of financial repression. It is still unclear whether other euro countries to follow the example of Paris and its citizens in other countries restrict the free, private use of their money.

This Financial "Seismograph" Signals A Monetary Earthquake (Taki T.)

Secular investors, in our view, protect themselves with hard assets. Just because hard assets are out of fashion, it is a right time to consider them. That does not mean that investors should go ‘all the way.’ The point is that there will be a time when hard assets provide the protection they have always provided in history.

Thinking Out Loud (Dana T.)

Buckminster Fuller, "Thinking Out Loud", 1996. Much is still relevant today.

Living Far From These Eyesores Keeps The Brain Healthy (Arthur Robey)

The study also found that people exposed to more air pollution had smaller brains.

How Much Would Zero Emissions Cost? (Tom K.)


According to Stanford University scientist and professor Mark Jacobson, 100 percent renewable generation is possible now and attainable by 2050. In fact, he’s developed a plan for all 50 states – and he’s put a price on it. The proposed 7,131-gigawatt Wind, Water, and Sunlight (WWS) system carries an upfront cost of $14 trillion and will create nearly 7 million long-term jobs (net 3 million), while addressing emissions from the three most polluting sectors. Considering market differences – and relative to GDP – the cost is comparable to a recent French study on the same topic.

Gold & Silver

Click to read the PM Daily Market Commentary: 5/1/15

Provided daily by the Peak Prosperity Gold & Silver Group

Article suggestions for the Daily Digest can be sent to [email protected]. All suggestions are filtered by the Daily Digest team and preference is given to those that are in alignment with the message of the Crash Course and the "3 Es."

12 Comments

saxplayer00o1's picture
saxplayer00o1
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 30 2009
Posts: 4240
Time2help's picture
Time2help
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 9 2011
Posts: 2892
Tall's picture
Tall
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 18 2010
Posts: 564
Who will pay for decommission of nukes?

At the edge of Humboldt Bay in northern California lies a relic from the heyday of U.S. nuclear power. The reactor was shut down in 1976. The remaining cost to decommission the plant once and for all -– cleaning up lingering radiological dangers, dismantling the remains -- will be about $441 million, according to its owner, PG&E Corp.

The question is who will pay -- for Humboldt Bay, and for dozens of other reactors that are in the process of closing or might soon. Nuclear operators like PG&E are supposed to lay up enough money to cover the costs, similar to how corporations fund pensions. Turns out, most haven’t.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-03/radioactive-and-short-on-cash

concad's picture
concad
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 8 2009
Posts: 4
Australia first country to introduce a tax on money itself

From the article: "buying equities in the USA may be the only real game in town to protect money"

LOL

The article paints Tony Abbot as a Marxist. Tony Abbot may be an incompetent conservative ideologue, but a Marxist he is most definitely is not.

many many LOL

I am an Australian and whoever wrote this article must live in another planet or even another universe. The 2015-2016 budget will not be brought down till next Tuesday.

rjs's picture
rjs
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 8 2009
Posts: 445
decommission nukes?
Tall wrote:

Who will pay for decommission of nukes?

has it ever been done?  i know some are no longer operating, but have any ever been completely dismantled and had the radioactive components hauled away,. allowing the site to be used for other purposes? 

Jbarney's picture
Jbarney
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 25 2010
Posts: 233
Maine/Vermont

I don't know all of the facts, but I believe Maine successfully shut down their nuclear reactor a while ago.

Currently here in Vermont, we are going through the process of shutting down Vermont Yankee, our 40 year old nuclear power plant.  Our current governor is a sleaze, but at least he wants the plant shut down.  Vermont is currently "negotiating" how much of the costs will be passed back to the tax payer and how much of the costs will be picked up by....Entergy....(the parent company) if memory serves correctly.

sand_puppy's picture
sand_puppy
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 13 2011
Posts: 2041
Elon Musk debuts the Tesla Powerwall

HarryFlashman's picture
HarryFlashman
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 1 2008
Posts: 55
Musk's New Toy

Can somebody please enlighten me as to why this battery thingy (not sure why it is different or has more utility or runs a car or what) is such a big deal? Is it revolutionary? And why are people here getting excited? It's not a new energy source,the charge that it stores still has to come from coal,oil,gas,renewable or nuclear? Do we really have people here who are dazzled by the shiniest new 'toys' that only rich people will be able to afford anyway! Why are you posting it here,a week after it was announced Sand Puppy,are you really so glamoured by Musk?

 

I just don't get it........

Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Online)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 3200
HarryFlashman wrote: Can
HarryFlashman wrote:

Can somebody please enlighten me as to why this battery thingy (not sure why it is different or has more utility or runs a car or what) is such a big deal? Is it revolutionary? And why are people here getting excited? It's not a new energy source,the charge that it stores still has to come from coal,oil,gas,renewable or nuclear? Do we really have people here who are dazzled by the shiniest new 'toys' that only rich people will be able to afford anyway! Why are you posting it here,a week after it was announced Sand Puppy,are you really so glamoured by Musk?

 

I just don't get it........

The viability of renewable energies is dependent on storage.  Solar and wind are intermittent.  Batteries are needed for the hours when the sun isn't out and/or wind isn't blowing.  They are also needed for electric transportation.  Traditional lead acid batteries are dirty, need lots of maintenance and are far from environmentally friendly.  Musk's power wall is compact, clean and easy to deal with.  Battery technology has been advancing fast recently.  I don't know if Musk's battery is the ultimate expression of progress, but it is certainly a step in the right direction.  And, it is affordable for anyone who has already reconciled themselves to acquiring solar or wind systems for personal or even community use.

sand_puppy's picture
sand_puppy
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 13 2011
Posts: 2041
Elon Musk's Vision of Distributed Energy Network

Like many here on pp, I have been a battery technology observer for a while.

What Musk articulates is a distributed power system, mostly based on renewable solar and wind, located at the home or small business of the user where the power will be used.

As Doug explained, movements towards this vision is what interests me.

Plus, it had good music.

dickey45's picture
dickey45
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 12 2008
Posts: 77
Lead acid batteries are heavy

Lead acid batteries are heavy and pretty expensive and only last 3-5 or so years.  We have 3 RV batteries on our basement wall that will run our sump pump, heating system and fridge for a few days in case our city electricity goes out.  And it does.  Last year it went out for over 8 hours.  If it were raining hard, our basement would flood.  These batteries would be a huge improvement.  With a good battery system, we could cut the electric cord and go only batteries (with gas and solar). 

rjs's picture
rjs
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 8 2009
Posts: 445
Maine Yankee
Jbarney wrote:

I don't know all of the facts, but I believe Maine successfully shut down their nuclear reactor a while ago.

i'm quoting wikipedia on Maine Yankee, assuming that's the one you're referring to..

The eight-year $500 million decommissioning process spanned from 1997 until 2005.[6] In 2000, the first structures were gutted out by workers. In 2003, the reactor pressure vessel was shipped to Barnwell, South Carolina via barge. Finally, in 2004, the facility's containment building was brought down by explosives.

As of 2010, questions remained about the final disposal of the plant's nuclear waste, following the scrapping of the planned national depository.[7]

 

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments